Industry campaigns for the easing of Canadian travel restrictions

[j.k.]

10 hours ago, Turbofan said:

And as bad as that number is.  It is not the number to be watching for.  That number will increase in perpetuity.  It is a rear view mirror number.  The evolution of the Spanish flu still circulates to this day.  If we applied the same methodology to it, it has killed over a billion.

For various reasons, some known and unknown to our medical professionals, pandemics/epidemics tend to become less lethal as time goes by.  They usually mutate for one, becoming more contagious but less virulent.  Immunity slowly rises making it harder for the virus to spread.  I will stop there because I’m not a professional in the medical field. But historically this is the path they take.  SARS, H1N1, MERS, Swine.  They all still circulate.  They all still kill people every year.  It’s just that the numbers of deaths associated has shrunk.  The medical community hopes Covid will follow the normal path.  The problem is they don’t know it will.  And if it does? When.
 

The point being, if you want to see in front of you, the windshield is the direction to look.  As we move into the second wave look for dropping ICU/death numbers and increasing Covid cases. This is an indication that the virus is progressing as expected. A good thing in an awful situation.
 

Here is a simple google search.  Drop in any country you want.  Take a look at some of the countries hardest hit last spring.  Look what is happening to their cases vs death.  They almost all have cases vs death now starting to move in the opposite direction of each other.  Cases up, but deaths flattening.

Since this pandemic will flow at different rates throughout the planet.  You will also probably be able to find countries that had almost no outbreak last spring.  Some of them will have cases and death rates rapidly increasing, as this fall is really their first exposure to Covid.

 

Covid death versus cases.
 

 

I don't think you understood the distinction I was making.

[Turbofan]

On 10/1/2020 at 7:44 AM, j.k. said:

... dead with Covid 19 so far.

 

Comorbidity?  That most people who die with  Covid have the simultaneous presence of two or more chronic diseases or conditions.

They are dying “with” Covid, not necessarily “of” Covid.  I believe I saw a number that here in Alberta over 70% have 3 or more cormorbidities.   What you are saying is correct.

The problem is that is another way of saying elderly, immunosuppressant, diabetic, Cancer, Lung diseases, and so on.

It won’t fly.

I was simply trying to point out that it’s not all doom and gloom.  Look forward.  Not back.

1) If Covid progresses as other Corona Viruses, the beast of the pandemic ( where death rates are high) may have already passed through large swaths of the planets population.  That will be indicated by increasing cases and dropping death in countries already hit.  It’s still to early but I’m sticking with hopeful because this is where we will see the first light at the end of the tunnel..  On the flip side we have many areas that were not impacted.  Those areas might be like the three little pigs In their brick house.  Safe locked down inside.  But eventually they have to come out and deal with the wolf.  IOW the wave of this pandemic will probably be at different stages in different areas.  We won’t emerge from this together, and all at once.

But on the positive side for areas not yet impacted.

2) We now know exactly who the at risk population is.  That has everything to do with your comments about comorbidities.  We know exactly who to focus on to protect.  We aren’t just guessing.

3) Rapid testing

4) Vaccine directed at the most vulnerable initially.

 

[Maverick]

https://www.medindia.net/patients/calculators/world-death-clock.asp

Death from Covid as opposed to death with Covid compared to the number of deaths overall is a rounding error.

We shut down the world on Neil Ferguson's completely flawed premise of a 4-5% predicted death rate.

[Turbofan]

21 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

I will suggest that this virus like all others has a will to survive. It mutates to ensure replication. The death of the host serves no purpose and so it modifies itself to become less lethal and more easily transmitted. It LEARNS!

To me....that is a VERY scary notion and yet I believe it to be widely accepted by epidemiologists.

You understand it the way it was explained to me.
 

But there are other factors as to why the normal course of a Corona Virus is to see increasing cases as death drops.
 

Immunity.  Not talking heard immunity.  As Covid spreads in the population immunity slowly grows. The lethality of the virus slowly drops. 
 

Initially Covid was making the rounds and we didn’t even know it was there.  So we weren’t testing for it.  Then when we realized we had a problem, we didn’t have tests.  Then not enough tests.  So the amount of cases was way under reported last Fall, Winter and Spring.  Deaths were easy to count.  But how many cases did we really have?  We will never know.

Now that we are testing. PCR tests for example are very accurate at finding Covid.  There limitation is that they can  also find it in people who had it weeks prior. So if we start massive PCR testing we will find both new cases and cases we missed in the past.

These two data limitations contribute toward an appearance of an upward trajectory in cases.  

There are probably more reasons and I am no medical doctor. It’s why I just dumbed it down to my level.
 

As a pandemic progresses, cases will climb, as deaths drop.  That is the normal path of a corona virus. 

[Turbofan]

A coincidence.  But the National Post published an article today on PCR testing.

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/when-is-a-case-of-covid-still-covid-critics-suggest-the-gold-standard-of-testing-could-be-too-sensitive

 

...the test — reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, or RT-PCR — is so sensitive it can pick up debris from an old infection. The test can be positive even after someone has cleared the live organism.

Although such low counts could imply either an early- or a late-stage infection, the long duration of the RNA-positive tail suggests that most infected people are being identified after the infectious period has passed,” Mina and colleagues write this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. (People usually have a higher amount of virus in their bodies at the beginning of an infection, and it tails off).

[Turbofan]

Finally some common sense.

WHO condemns Lockdown as primary method to control virus.

He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty

“We in the World Health Organisation do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” 

 

“The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganise, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition.”

https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/coronavirus-who-backflips-on-virus-stance-by-condemning-lockdowns/news-story/f2188f2aebff1b7b291b297731c3da74

[dagger]

On 10/2/2020 at 9:01 PM, Turbofan said:

A coincidence.  But the National Post published an article today on PCR testing.

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/when-is-a-case-of-covid-still-covid-critics-suggest-the-gold-standard-of-testing-could-be-too-sensitive

 

...the test — reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, or RT-PCR — is so sensitive it can pick up debris from an old infection. The test can be positive even after someone has cleared the live organism.

Although such low counts could imply either an early- or a late-stage infection, the long duration of the RNA-positive tail suggests that most infected people are being identified after the infectious period has passed,” Mina and colleagues write this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. (People usually have a higher amount of virus in their bodies at the beginning of an infection, and it tails off).

The Atlantic has a great article on why rapid tests are not the answer for primary detection, too many false negatives and false positives, but they might be good in situations where they complement mask wearing and other measures. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/10/do-rapid-antigen-tests-have-accuracy-problem/616681/

[boestar]

Its funny how no one wanted to listen to the WHO when they advocated for Lockdowns but now push to adopt the  recommendations of not locking down.

The Tides keep turning

 

[Turbofan]

5 hours ago, boestar said:

Its funny how no one wanted to listen to the WHO when they advocated for Lockdowns but now push to adopt the  recommendations of not locking down.

The Tides keep turning

 

The WHO is claiming their recommendations for lockdown has never changed.

They claim they have alway recommended lockdown, but only as a last resort, and only in a temporary way to regroup.

They claim their lockdown recommendations never included using it as a first resort.

The problem they are pointing out is that rich nations might be able to weather this by paying people to sit at home.  Poor nations are starving as a result.  On balance globally we are doing more harm than good.

Notice this got almost no media coverage in North America.  Pathetic.

[Turbofan]

A Pandemic is signified by increasing cases and increasing death in tandem.  The pandemic ends when cases continue to climb but death stops climbing in tandem.  Cases and death split and head in separate directions.

Note the UK cases vs death graphs.  They have now split.  Just an example.  All nations hit hard last spring now have cases vs death graphs that look similar.

 

[Turbofan]

Note the India cases vs deaths graph.  They went into harsh lockdown in the spring.  Remember the news showing people being hit with sticks by police.

All their lockdown accomplished was to delay the outbreak.  Even that statement might be too positive as India’s time frame for virus spread is summer.  Not fall, winter, spring like in Canada.  Their lockdown may have actually accomplished nothing.

[Turbofan]

Here is Canada.  A nation not hit hard but still had outbreak.  Lockdown was modest out west.  Harsher the farther East you travel. Still to early to say if we have a definitive break between cases and death.  Way too early to say if Canada will emerge from the Pandemic together.  Is Eastern Canada simply delaying the inevitable?  
 

Time will tell if the WHO is right when they state.  The only thing lockdowns achieve is poverty. Will the Atlantic bubble accomplish anything other than making Eastern Canadians poorer?

[UpperDeck]

Turbofan....

 

Your problem is....you're thinking.

In absolute terms, there were only so many ways in which to respond to this virus. Death was an inevitable regardless and yet it is that unavoidable consequence that is invoked to support one's favoured response.

Reductio ab adsurdum.....lock yourself and loved ones in a room. Assuming you are not infected, you will not succumb to the virus. You will starve to death. 

Simply wearing a mask and washing your hands ( regularly), will limit but not prevent exposure.....but to whom or what? The virus or to persons infected?

There is a difference....a very significant difference.

And the question becomes....how probable is YOUR exposure to someone who is infected with the virus AND contagious? Depending upon where you live and what you do, the odds might be as low as .001% or as high as 10% and the probability of resulting death ranging from virtually non-existent to 1%.

Yes....a harsh consequence but some innocent loved ones will die in the course of enjoying their lives.....and others will have lives to enjoy.

[Turbofan]

2 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

Turbofan....

 

Your problem is....you're thinking.

In absolute terms, there were only so many ways in which to respond to this virus. Death was an inevitable regardless and yet it is that unavoidable consequence that is invoked to support one's favoured response.

Reductio ab adsurdum.....lock yourself and loved ones in a room. Assuming you are not infected, you will not succumb to the virus. You will starve to death. 

Simply wearing a mask and washing your hands ( regularly), will limit but not prevent exposure.....but to whom or what? The virus or to persons infected?

There is a difference....a very significant difference.

And the question becomes....how probable is YOUR exposure to someone who is infected with the virus AND contagious? Depending upon where you live and what you do, the odds might be as low as .001% or as high as 10% and the probability of resulting death ranging from virtually non-existent to 1%.

Yes....a harsh consequence but some innocent loved ones will die in the course of enjoying their lives.....and others will have lives to enjoy.

From a rich counties perspective yes.

From a poor countries perspective it is lockdown, not Covid, that has a greater probability of impoverishment and death.

The point being lockdown is not harmless.  Lockdown is not about prioritizing lives on this planet.  It’s about prioritizing my life over someone else. We may think lockdown is for the greater good, but in fact It kills too.

lockdown needs to used only when absolutely necessary.  Beyond that the cure becomes worse than the disease.

In the WHO’s words.

The only thing lockdowns achieve is poverty

[UpperDeck]

Turbofan...

 

Huh? Suggest you re-read my post with more widely- focussed lenses. I was SUPPORTING your position that lockdowns were punitive and not demonstrably a meani gful longterm inhibition to virus spread.

[Specs]

Well who will come out of this economically stronger and united - China, who put lockdowns in place at the first sign of trouble, or the Americans?

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Turbofan]

7 hours ago, Specs said:

Well who will come out of this economically stronger and united - China, who put lockdowns in place at the first sign of trouble, or the Americans?

The country that imposes no restrictions will do the least economic damage.  Countries that were overwhelmed on their first wave and had little chance to restrict will also do the least economic damage.  My guess is the Americans and China will be similar.

Countries that are successful at flattening the curve extend the time it takes for the virus to move through the population and do more economic damage.

Countries or areas that go into lockdown and stay there, do the most economic damage and accomplish nothing because the virus will still need to move through.

The key is to find a balance.  Trying to keep the economy rolling as best as possible without overwhelming the healthcare system.  

 

[dagger]

36 minutes ago, Turbofan said:

The country that imposes no restrictions will do the least economic damage.  Countries that were overwhelmed on their first wave and had little chance to restrict will also do the least economic damage.  My guess is the Americans and US will be similar.

Countries that are successful at flattening the curve extend the time it takes for the virus to move through the population and do more economic damage.

Countries or areas that go into lockdown and stay there, do the most economic damage and accomplish nothing because the virus will still need to move through.

The key is to find a balance.  Trying to keep the economy rolling as best as possible without overwhelming the healthcare system.  

 

No, no one is going to a restaurant or bar when cases zoom through the roof. Industries will see absenteeism rocket along with case counts if no efforts are made to curb them. No conferences, trade shows, or other large scale gatherings are possible while the virus is growing exponentially. Sweden had among the laxest approach to the virus but has suffered economically along with its neighbours because the global economy is so integrated. 

The problem with walking the fine line approach is that by the time you take action in response to a surge in cases, you are lagging the virus itself. The hospitalizations and deaths come later. I don't see a general lockdown coming, but some regions and sectors are just more prone to rapid spread and will have to be bear the brunt of "walking the line".

The concept of herd immunity is being thoroughly discredited.

 

[Turbofan]

16 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

Turbofan...

 

Huh? Suggest you re-read my post with more widely- focussed lenses. I was SUPPORTING your position that lockdowns were punitive and not demonstrably a meani gful longterm inhibition to virus spread.

My apologies.  I read your post wrong.

cheers

[Turbofan]

2 minutes ago, dagger said:

No, no one is going to a restaurant or bar when cases zoom through the roof. Industries will see absenteeism rocket along with case counts if no efforts are made to curb them. No conferences, trade shows, or other large scale gatherings are possible while the virus is growing exponentially. Sweden had among the laxest approach to the virus but has suffered economically along with its neighbours because the global economy is so integrated. 

The problem with walking the fine line approach is that by the time you take action in response to a surge in cases, you are lagging the virus itself. The hospitalizations and deaths come later. I don't see a general lockdown coming, but some regions and sectors are just more prone to rapid spread and will have to be bear the brunt of "walking the line".

The concept of herd immunity is being thoroughly discredited.

 

Dagger,

Yes your comments are all correct.  But you left out the effects of time. The choice is flatter and longer.  Or sharper and shorter.  If the economy was the sole issue, which it isn’t, which of these two produces the least economic damage.  Sharper and shorter.

Flattening the curve elongates the pandemic.  It’s a fact.  I’m not suggesting we don’t do it because it’s a balance. I’m simply stating it is the consequence.

The point I’m trying to bring forward is flattening the curve has a human/economic price tag simply because it elongates the financial strain. It should be used in a way that produces the best cost benefit.

In an ideal world we would have the virus moving through society right at the limits of the health care system.  Least human cost.

 

[dagger]

Again, I disagree. As fast as the virus seems to be moving, it has still only impacted a small minority of the population in any country, and if you don't pump the brakes, it can still take years to infect a majority. 

As for the economy, I'm a contrarian. I believe - more so with every passing day - that once we reach herd immunity via a vaccine, the recovery will be robust, faster than expected, because there is enormous pent-up demand, and while much is rightly written about people in greater need because of the pandemic, little has been written about people unable to spend money they usually spend because of the virus: hundreds of millions of people who want to take foreign trips, employees who will want to go to a trade show or conference because that's how they really learn about developments in their field... it goes on and on. I see 2022 as the start of another boom for the airlines... it may not manifest itself fully until mid-2022, but it will. 

[Turbofan]

33 minutes ago, dagger said:

 

The concept of herd immunity is being thoroughly discredited.

 

I was stating this at the beginning.  Corona viruses mutate too quickly and our immune system has a short memory for them.  Herd immunity never occurs for cold viruses that is why the circulate so easily.  These are the same reasons why many are sceptical of a vaccine.  

But the statement leads one to believe immunity is not part of the long term solution. That’s not true.  The problem right now is that our immune system doesn’t recognize the virus.  The virus multiplies without confrontation from the immune system to a point that becomes lethal.  Once our immune system starts to recognize the virus it will oppose it from the start.  Making it less lethal.

It didn’t go away. It never will. Our bodies slowly start to recognize it and deal wth it.  When that happens on a large scale we will call it a cold.

To see this already happening in stats look at the cases vs death rates diverge from each other.  Initially cases and death will climb together as our immune system doesn’t do anything. Then immune systems will start to fight back, cases will continue to climb as death drops.

Herd immunity is never achieved.  We keep spreading that cold.  But we no longer care because it’s just a cold.

[dagger]

2 hours ago, Malcolm said:

Taking the forecast from UAL today that biz travel will only return to normal in 2024 (I'm more bullish, I think it will be mid-2022), I'd say some countries have wasted a massive pile of money by trying to sustain too much airline capacity. They may need second and third rounds of bailouts. I don't know when and to what extent our government will act, but I do suspect if it does, it will target a level of activity sufficient to meet current needs, not some pie-in-the-sky notion of imminent recovery that motivated bailouts in places like the US and Germany.